Recap on "to what content-type can LONGDESC refer?" [1]
1. The WAI does not recommend placing a content-type restriction on the
resource referenced by this attribute in HTML, XHTML, SMIL or other
referring format. [2]
2. There are some residual concerns that this freedom may be abused. We
consider that most such resources will be of type text/html or possibly
text/plain. But strictly limiting it to those choices eliminates options
that actually can make the content more accessible, when richer media
options are judicuously used. [2]
3. The PF Working Group in particular would like hypertext format
developers to note that LONGDESC was designed to deal with limitations of
the IMG element and is not an ideal form of solution. In addition, it
appears to conflict with the pattern of practice supported by X-Link. We
expect that LONGDESC will appropriately be retired from service with all
deliberate speeed as other, more XML-appropriate forms of X-Link takes hold
in usage, and we would like to work with you in engineering the changeover.
[3]
4. We would still like to request that formats using the LONGDESC attribute
link to the WCAG in their description of this attribute where the purpose
of the attribute is well explained. [2]
Al
/for WAI-PF, on consultation with WAI-GL as directed by WAI-CG.
[1] Initial question
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-cg/1999JulSep/0060
[2] No content-type constraint per se, but link to WCAG:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/1999JulSep/0246
[3] Note on retiring LONGDESC
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/1999JulSep/0403.html
me: Retiring LONGDESC
RL:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/1999JulSep/0403.
html